Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, Hungary is once again in Parliament's plenary. Yes, again in Parliament's plenary. Unfortunately, that is the whole problem. The Hungarian government does not accept its breaches of the rule of law, does not accept criticism from the EU and does not want to amend itself. The measures taken are obviously simply to throw powder in the eyes, so they are not effective and do not produce the expected effects. This is the case for the Integrity Authority set up by the Hungarian Government to satisfy the Commission’s requests. This authority does not have the powers to carry out its anti-corruption tasks. The Commission must therefore pay close attention to the burdens it imposes on Hungary in the area of the rule of law. It is by no means sufficient to require that means be put in place. It is not enough to demand measures, it is necessary to demand results. And it is on the results that Hungary needs to be measured, also in the case of the Integrity Authority. Thus, apart from all the existing rule of law problems, including corruption and judicial independence, there is now the creation of a Sovereignty Defence Authority, which allows the Hungarian state to use a so-called ‘foreign anti-influence’ law to effectively gag any opposition to the government. This is the typical case of embezzlement of a law originally inspired by Europe, but used in the "Russian" fashion which, instead of protecting citizens and democracy, is transformed into an intimidation law to prevent civil society, journalists and politicians from expressing their opposition to power. The Commission has, moreover, quite rightly launched proceedings against Hungary following the introduction of that law. Finally, I would like to point out that the Council did not play its part in Article 7 and also raise once again the difficult situation in which the European Union will be at the time when Hungary assumes the Presidency of the Union on 1 July, at a crucial moment for the European Union, in the aftermath of the elections and at the time of the constitution of a new Commission. In this Parliament, we asked the Council to take its responsibilities and to consider postponing this Hungarian Presidency to a later stage. This was not done. The 26 must now be particularly vigilant.

Mr President, the death of Alexei Navalny, a crime for which the Russian regime is responsible, has brought back to me a huge cry of anger, a deep revolt. This authoritarian, dictatorial regime of Vladimir Putin’s Russian regime crushes all those who oppose it by eliminating them as if they were pawns, not human beings. Il écrase les opposants politiques, mais aussi tous ceux qui, simples citoyens, avocats ou journalistes, expriment la vérité. Prisons are full of prisoners who have committed no other crime than telling the truth. I will mention the name of journalist Alsu Kurmasheva, who is waiting in prison without knowing anything about her fate. It is our duty to support those in Russia and around the world who are fighting for truth, freedom and democracy. And at home, we have an obligation to fight these extreme parties that justify the Russian regime, that participate in the threat against our democratic values and institutions in an open or underground way. I would like to end with Alexei Navalny: If they decide to kill me, you are not allowed to give up. We will continue to wage a constant struggle for freedom and democracy.

Mr President, the rule of law is still not guaranteed in Hungary. New laws, contrary to the fundamental values of the European Union, continue to be passed. Therefore, the fact that the Commission is releasing funds for Hungary poses a danger to the defence of EU rights and the safeguarding of EU funds. While it is important to ensure that the institutions are not blocked – and Viktor Orban does not hesitate to block our Union by abusing the veto – we cannot in any way agree to be blackmailed. The credibility of the European Union is at stake. If we disapprove of the release of funds by the Commission, it is above all the Council that we criticise for its lack of effective action under Article 7. It is the Council that has the power to decide on sanctions, which would prevent the Hungarian government from blocking the Union. It was the Council that had the power to decide that the Hungarian government would not hold the presidency in the next half of the year. It is the Council that must shoulder its responsibilities and do everything in its power to prevent the Hungarian President, from July onwards, from assuming, in addition to the Presidency of the European Union, the Presidency of the Council. This scenario is absolutely unacceptable and even unthinkable.

Madam President, Commissioner, six years have passed since the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Two days ago, we marked this sad anniversary, for a Maltese journalist, who had made the defense of the truth her struggle, at the cost of her life. In a letter we received from his family yesterday, we learn that the public inquiry that was conducted comes to the conclusion that the state bears responsibility for his death, as it created an atmosphere of impunity that led to the destruction of the rule of law. The rule of law must guarantee fundamental rights, including freedom of the press. It must also, in a consistent manner, fight corruption, which is its worst enemy. The killing of journalists like Daphne Caruana Galizia and Ján Kuciak is a disgrace to our democracies, and the work of investigative journalists deserves our utmost respect. Because they face all kinds of threats, but they still continue. Awareness of the importance of these journalists for democracies is paramount. They provide information so that citizens can know and judge. They are at the heart of a democracy worthy of the name. We need to protect them. This is the intention of the resolution presented to Parliament, and I would like to refer to the directive on manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings against public participation – SLAPP – which must enter into force during the current parliamentary term. Let us adopt it and attack corruption, as Daphne's family demands.

Mr President, Mr High Representative, the death of Mahsa Amini remains in our memories as a thorn, a thorn that will never come out of it again. A year later, we do not forget. We do not forget this tragedy, which was the spark of a movement, unprecedented in its scale and duration, against power in Iran. One year to condemn the murder of Mahsa Amini, this young woman of just 22 years. One year to condemn the brutal repression, executions, imprisonments, torture, the use of violence against women and demonstrators, against all those who fight for freedom. Unfortunately, a year later, this regime continues to crush its population and violence against it has increased further in the run-up to this anniversary. We admire and stand in solidarity with the Iranian population in revolt. She shows exceptional courage in the face of a shameless regime that oppresses its people and supports Russia in its war of aggression against Ukraine. Your fight is also ours. I would like to close with this powerful formula that unites so many men and women: (speaks in a non-official language) woman, life, freedom.

– Mr President, the scale and severity of attacks on journalists have increased considerably and this goes hand in hand with a decline in democracy worldwide. Journalists’ investigations, their fight to inform, are essential for the preservation of the rule of law and democracy. But in doing so, journalists expose themselves to the repression of authoritarian states, criminal networks and all those who are willing to do anything to prevent the disclosure of their dishonest, often corruption-related, cases. Intimidation, online defamation, imprisonment, torture, disappearances, assassinations. Unfortunately, this is what many journalists around the world are exposed to. We must denounce these facts and give every possible support to journalists who face reprisals against themselves and their families in order to divulge the truth. In this report – and let me also warmly thank my shadow rapporteur colleagues for the teamwork we have been able to achieve – we make many and various recommendations to strengthen the European Union’s policy on the protection of journalists. We mention, among other things: media literacy; combating the dissemination of messages that incite violence against journalists; an emergency plan to be followed by EU delegations, including visits to journalists at risk, prison visits and trial assistance; assistance to third countries, at their request, in designing legal frameworks favourable to the promotion of journalism and the protection of journalists; Finally, exchanges and training for journalists and judges concerned. I would like to make one more point. Disinformation and propaganda now used on a very large scale, in particular by authoritarian regimes, endanger the very profession of journalist, all over the world. Fact-checkers also play a key role in supporting the credibility of investigative journalism. They are particularly vulnerable to reprisals. However, it is crucial that citizens know that they have access to trusted information. If citizens doubt the very possibility of obtaining credible information, they will no longer have confidence in democracy. Citizens have the right to be informed, journalists the right to inform.

Mr President, when the safety of journalists is not guaranteed, citizens can no longer rely on free and fair information. As we know, investigative journalism is an indispensable part of democracies. Journalists must be able to work serenely and without self-censorship. This freedom is not given in totalitarian countries, but it is not given in our countries either. When journalists face abusive lawsuits, harassment, intimidation, reputational damage, these abusive lawsuits have the sole purpose of morally and financially exhausting those who fight to reveal the truth. This is simply not acceptable. Daphne Caruana Galizia had provided an enlightening definition of what an abusive prosecution is. I quote her: “laws that have been designed to protect genuinely injured people are used as a tool for abuse and aggression by those in power against powerless people”. The proposal for a directive against abusive prosecutions is an important step. It gives the tools to enable the judiciary to prosecute those who abuse our laws and thus protect the spirit of the law. We must give ourselves all the necessary means to protect our journalists, as well as human rights defenders, and thus safeguard democracy.

Mr President, in 2017, the European Parliament launched the Article 7 procedure against Hungary. Since then, the rule of law in Hungary has steadily deteriorated. The government of Viktor Orbán now allows itself to legislate by decree and pass laws at night, without Parliament having a say. We have a different conception of democracy. We are tabling a resolution in plenary for the umpteenth time covering old, but also new, breaches of the rule of law by the Hungarian government and reaffirming our determination to protect the EU budget. In addition, we draw the Council’s attention to the fact that Hungary is due to resume the Presidency of the European Union from July 2024. This is the moment when a new Parliament will start its work after the European elections. This will also be the semester in which a new Commission will be appointed. This is therefore a particularly important moment in the legislature. Therefore, the authors of this resolution would like to express their deep concern, because the statements that Viktor Orbán was able to make on the European Union, but also the official visits that he might decide to make, or the characters he might decide to receive during a Hungarian presidency, could pose real problems of credibility for the European Union. We respect the treaties. It is not for us to tell the Council what it has to decide in the circumstances. However, it is our duty to make the Council attentive to our concerns more than justified, and to ask it to act. And there's an emergency. Article 7 gives the Council a wide margin of manoeuvre, but it still needs to act.

Mr President, Commissioner, there are times when we miss words. In front of a mother whose child committed suicide because of the harassment inflicted on her, we feel completely helpless. Yet the courage of this mother also makes us want to fight. Jackie Fox turned her grief into strength, and acted to prevent other young people from the fate of her daughter. His struggle in Ireland led to the passing of a law, Coco’s Law, which criminalises online harassment. Today, Jackie is speaking to the European Union. The Internet and its social networks are powerful tools that allow us, among other things, to stay connected to our families and friends. Unfortunately, they are also instruments available to unscrupulous and malicious aggressors. Faced with the intention to harm, the anonymity of the executioner, and the lack of accountability, the victim is destitute. We must be aware that this brutal persecution affects almost half of young people in the European Union, too often leading them to scarification, self-harm, if not suicide. It is therefore inconceivable that harassment be taken lightly or minimized. Some Member States have already adopted legal provisions against cyberbullying, and we need to take this up at European level. The European institutions have well recognised the dangers posed by online harassment. But in order to be efficient, it is necessary to adopt a concrete strategy in all Member States in order to cope with the scale of the phenomenon. Online harassment kills. It is up to us to make it a criminal offence throughout the European Union. Now is the time to act. Thank you Jackie!

Madam President, Prime Minister, the European Union, and within it Luxembourg, continues to be a haven that attracts and welcomes. Our strength today lies in this. But the European Union is also at a crossroads. We need more Europe to face a world that has become much more hostile to democracies and has seen the return of war on the European continent, due to an autocratic and hegemonic Russia that has invaded Ukraine. We need more Europe for more autonomy, especially in relation to China, and the crises that have followed in recent years have also brought this certainty to our citizens. The COVID-19 pandemic has inspired the will of EU citizens for a European Health Union. It seems to me, in this context, Prime Minister, that Luxembourg should play a leading role, especially since we have the European Health and Digital Executive Agency in Luxembourg. The pandemic has also resulted in shortages and has shown that for essential goods, whether medicines, food or life-saving technology, we cannot depend on other continents. We need to bring production back to Europe, also to Luxembourg, both to ensure our autonomy and with environmental protection in mind. And the same goes for our safety. Our citizens know that peace is not a given and that European defence has become indispensable. We need a Union that is militarily capable of making decisions, and autonomous decisions. The dependencies in which we are entangled – energy, economic and military – weaken us. We need decision-making autonomy and de facto autonomy. This will be done – or not done – together. In the European Union, every country has an important voice. We expect Luxembourg’s foreign policy to take these realities into account and that, within the European Union, for our security and peace, we act in favour of a powerful Union.

Madam President, Commissioner, dear rapporteur, in a world where authoritarian regimes are developing in a worrying way, human rights defenders play an absolutely essential role in promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law. In this sense, they are true allies of the European Union. We have a responsibility to protect and support them in their activities in defence of democracy. It is difficult to imagine what many human rights defenders endure, but also their relatives, families and friends, harassed, imprisoned, tortured and sometimes even murdered. These lawyers, journalists, politicians, members of organisations, but also ordinary citizens often put their safety, when it is not their lives, at stake to defend the values we believe in. So when they risk imprisonment, when their lives are threatened, we owe it to them to facilitate their urgent relocation and access to a visa. Beyond that, there is also a need to combat impunity for those who persecute human rights defenders. Because committed people who organise demonstrations or defend their ancestral lands or simply document human rights violations cannot be tolerated to be persecuted. The EU’s global human rights sanctions regime, the Magnitsky Act, allows us to target serious human rights violations and abuses around the world. It must be used against the culprits. To conclude, I would like to repeat that these men and women are fighting for the most basic of rights: human rights. They oppose injustice. Their situation is unacceptable and we owe them a great deal. We really owe them a lot.

Madam President, the Istanbul Convention is a flagship tool to combat violence against women and girls, and domestic violence. It is first and foremost a question of preventing such violence, but also of eliminating impunity, which all too often reinforces the aggressors. There is a huge amount of work to be done to ensure that there is awareness on the part of the people who are able to help. The victim’s listening must be empathetic, as soon as he or she has spoken, his or her protection must be effective and, lastly, the prosecution of the aggressor must be effective. Because when the victim fears not being taken seriously, when she fears not being protected, when she often fears for her life, when she fears that the only consequences of her denunciation are that she will be punished by her executioner, the vicious circle is never interrupted. The European Union has signed the Istanbul Convention, but has not ratified it. Twenty-one EU countries have signed and ratified the Istanbul Convention. The remaining six countries have also signed, but not ratified, and oppose ratification at European level. Article 2 of our Treaty obliges us, even beyond obvious moral considerations, to sign this Convention. Qualified majority voting in the Council is sufficient, and it allows the European Union to move forward. Let us therefore ratify the Istanbul Convention!

Madam President, first of all, I would like to thank you for the debate that has taken place. But given some statements, I would really like to reiterate that I am proud to be the rapporteur for a text that, here in Parliament, reaffirms the dignity of every human being, the right to be who you are, to love who you love and to believe or not believe. I would really like to thank my colleagues for this text, which we were able to produce in this way. Some totalitarianisms also seek at international level to change the very definition of human rights. I must say that I am rather saddened that they have found a relay in this Parliament for this. Then I also hear colleagues, when they are told: Here's what's wrong, answer: We're looking at what's wrong with another place. It is a way of diverting the conversation that is excessively unpleasant. Finally, I would like to thank Commissioner Reynders once again for all he has said and for the Commission's action. And I must say that I am particularly pleased that the European Union’s global sanctions regime, which has been called for many times by Parliament, has emerged. Two points, if I may, will, I believe, really increase its effectiveness. First, the request, already made by another colleague, to add corruption. Second, qualified majority voting, which would be very welcome when it comes to sanctions when it comes to human rights. Thanks again to all colleagues, it was a pleasure to work with them.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when presenting the European Parliament’s annual report on the state of democracy and human rights in the world, let me start with a few positive notes, thinking of all those women and men around the world who stand up for democracy and for human rights. Their dedication and self-sacrifice inspire and give courage. The risk to their lives to obtain freedom and dignity must give us the measure of these values that we defend. In this document, Parliament reiterates the extent to which the European Union is and remains committed to fundamental values, the rule of law, democracy and human rights. It emphasises what we are doing to support democracy and human rights and, above all, reaffirms the universality of human rights, rights that seek to protect human dignity, just as it reaffirms our unconditional choice of democracy. These speeches, which today want to denigrate democracy, portraying it as ineffective and undesirable, inferior to authoritarianism, we reject them and refer to the unprecedented number of people around the world who are ready to sacrifice themselves for democracy and the freedom it entails. The report also provides new avenues for our positions and actions to become more effective in defending human rights and democracy. If I felt it necessary to reaffirm this evidence and speak of courage, it is because the state of democracy in the world is worrying and the evolution is ongoing, even more so. Countries that lean towards authoritarianism are twice as numerous as countries moving towards more democracy. Even long-established democracies, as we have unfortunately seen, are not immune. A real awareness is therefore needed to understand the global atmosphere, where false propaganda and large-scale disinformation reign, which is suitable for populism and endangers our democracies. We must take full measure of the challenges that, under these conditions, are before us. In defence and democracy, we must make this fight against disinformation a top priority. Because if democracies do not win the battle for information, for freedom of expression, if we do not guarantee a place for independent journalism that succeeds in making itself heard, we will not win against the interference of authoritarian countries at home and elsewhere in the world. Freedom of the press is an indispensable condition for democracy. However, the attacks against it are constant. The oppression of journalists is therefore one of the many issues addressed in this report. The situation of women in the world is also declining. The Covid crisis and food insecurity, further exacerbated by the war against Ukraine, are heavily affecting women, as are children who have been left out of school. And many women and children have been severely affected by domestic violence. Rising populism is fertile ground for intolerance, xenophobia, racism and discrimination. The importance of education in this context is self-evident. Finally, I would like to end with Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine. It seemed to me a necessity that in this 2022 report of the European Parliament the atrocities committed on Ukrainian soil on our doorstep should be condemned and that EU solidarity should be reaffirmed. I very sincerely thank my colleagues, the shadow rapporteurs, their teams and those of the political groups, as well as my own team. Only exemplary collaboration and mutual respect have allowed us to achieve this result.

Madam President, I believe in our democracy and I believe in our values. To protect them, to even allow them to exist, journalists play a key role. They are indispensable to democracy. Defending journalists also means safeguarding freedom of expression and the independence of the media. Reliable information enables citizens to make informed decisions. It is by creating the necessary area of freedom and the required security conditions that journalists will be able to exercise their profession: inform the public, with all the seriousness that this task entails. It is up to us to create the necessary legal conditions for their work environment to be safe. That is why I welcome our texts, which seek to prevent abusive legal proceedings or, where necessary, to promote close police protection. Today, however, forms of harassment of journalists have multiplied and are taking unexpected forms. On the net, using social media, it is often the reputation that is sought to be destroyed, especially when it comes to investigative journalists or fact-checkers. Unfortunately, the figures show that women journalists are even more targeted than their colleagues. We need to be aware of this new data and adapt all our measures, including at Member State level.

Mr President, what can we say today about foreign interference endangering democracy? We are now – and I would say – focusing on disinformation by foreign bodies, on China’s disproportionate influence on our economies and infrastructure, and on Russia’s disproportionate economic and political influence, with its active party support or influence in elections. We must protect ourselves and detect the flaws in our system that allow these power grabs, which I would call underground. Our openness to the world, our freedoms of expression, the press and many others, these values that are so dear to us, contain in them the risks that sometimes prevent us from protecting ourselves. However, it is imperative that we find a way to counter these attacks and decisively prevent disinformation from circulating, while protecting our freedoms. Yes, it is a war of disinformation that is being waged. The goal is the weakening of our democracy. Maintaining our freedoms by preventing foreign interference: This is the challenge. Today, we need to talk about corruption, which is causing damage that also undermines trust in democracy. When a foreign power uses it, it is foreign interference. Corruption is illegal, our laws punish it. We have confidence in justice at home, where the rule of law is in place.

Mr President, the death of Mahsa Amini is a tragedy. The Iranian population in revolt demonstrates exceptional courage given the brutality of the repression. I thought that the most appropriate way to condemn the violence of the Iranian authorities against its population, and women in particular, was to give a voice to those who revolt. So I will quote one of those anonymous but determined young Iranians who are rising up and putting a lot of hope in us. This young Iranian intended to leave his country but decided to stay and fight. I quote it in English. “We believe the world might have a wrong and distorted image from Iranian people, especially over the past decades. But we want to correct it. We are not this government, we hate it. We are Iranians, from a country with more than 2,500 years of history. We believe in love, peace, human rights. We hate brutal Islamic laws. And for this, our children, our young people are killed by the regime. We might be arrested or killed.’ – But, he continues, this is only the beginning for a profound change. They ask us Europeans to help them by refusing any compromise with an oppressive regime. Let's support these young Iranians in their fight.

Madam President, Ursula von der Leyen, in her State of the Union address, said that the Commission would protect the EU budget by using the conditionality mechanism. This is what the Commission is doing with the present proposals on Hungary, on which the Council now has to take a decision. While the proposed measures are intended to protect the EU budget, the shortcomings underlying these measures clearly show that the rule of law is at risk in Hungary. The independence of the judiciary is a major problem. Indeed, neither the principles of legal certainty nor the prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive power are guaranteed, which is however essential given the findings of various irregularities, systematic deficiencies and weaknesses in public procurement. The financial interests of the Union are clearly at risk. However, it is inconceivable, especially in the current crisis conditions where many EU citizens are struggling with the end of the month, that EU funds are allocated under conditions of non-transparency and in a context of increased risk of corruption and conflicts of interest. May the Council react quickly!

Madam President, the unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine is an attack on the international order. We must condemn it unreservedly and help the Ukrainian people by all means to win this war, for security in Europe and for the safeguarding of democracy on our continent. But the abuses of Russian officials go far beyond concerns about maintaining international order. The very notion of human dignity is annihilated when faced with the deportation of civilians thousands of kilometres from their place of life and the forced adoption of Ukrainian children in Russia. These are abject acts reminiscent of the times we had hoped had passed on the European continent. However, they are committed on a large scale, with more than 1.5 million Ukrainians deported, including more than 200 000 children. These acts cannot go unpunished. Every effort should therefore be made to gather evidence of the crimes committed and to bring the perpetrators before an international tribunal as soon as possible.

Madam President, Commissioner, having to present a report such as this is a difficult time. Hungary is a country of the European Union and, as such, it has to respect the values on which the Union is founded. While Hungary has deviated from these values, we have failed to keep it on the path on which we want to move forward together. It is also a collective failure that we are here. That said, the criticism made by the defenders of the Orbán government that in the other EU countries there are also discrepancies that are blamed on the Hungarian government is really not valid. Indeed, while some states need to work on either point in order to fully respect the rule of law, these countries agree and, in principle, take steps to address it. In Hungary, the difference is that we do not face isolated problems, but the problems are systemic. Deviations from the rule of law have widened rather than been narrowed or eliminated. Moreover, the Hungarian Government denies that there are problems and shows no willingness to change anything. This report – and I thank the rapporteur for keeping this course throughout – we wanted it to be factual. It identifies breaches of the rule of law in full respect of the facts. Its strength lies in extensive research and documentation. The evidence comes from official reports and statements from international organisations such as the Venice Commission, the United Nations, the Council of Europe. Reference is also made to judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. As for the extent of the problems mentioned in the report, this is reflected in the table of contents alone. I would simply like to refer in particular to the problems of judicial independence, which the Commissioner has discussed at length, but also to those relating to media pluralism. I would particularly like to point out this one, because impartial, or at least plural, information is essential for a well-functioning democracy. However, public support goes to the press close to the government, which leads to the weakening of the independence of the media. It is important that the Commission and the Council take steps to influence the attitude of the Hungarian government in order to restore the rule of law in Hungary.

Madam President, defending democracy, giving our support to those, government or civil society, who are trying to safeguard democracy is a duty, but also a necessity, not to put ourselves at risk. Authoritarian regimes are on the rise around the world. We must affirm with conviction that democracy is the goal, that democracy is the form of government most capable of respecting the human being and a guarantor of respect for human rights. Many commentators drew a parallel between the situation of Ukraine and that of Taiwan. Both have a powerful neighbor who considers their territory to belong to him. In recent years, Russian aggression against Ukraine has continued to grow, while the West has been mostly preaching a conciliatory attitude so that Russia does not feel provoked. We saw the result. An authoritarian country does not need provocations to use force. The only thing that can stop him is the certainty that his aggression is doomed to failure. This is what must determine our positions and actions. There is no doubt that we do not hesitate to defend democracies. China must know that we stand with Taiwan.

Madam President, the rule of law must be respected. The President of the Commission promised to do so. I assume that she keeps her word. Therefore, it is not a question of isolating Hungary and Poland within the European Union, but of protecting the Hungarian and Polish peoples and finding ways to convince those countries to return to the path of the rule of law. If Poland, as it stands, can be convinced that the judicial reforms we are demanding will be carried out in a short period of time, I can accept the publicity of a green light given to the Polish recovery plan, since this green light requires judicial reforms to take place now, before the funds are disbursed. This is a matter of rhetoric, since the conditions will still have to be met. The deadlines shall be indicated in the approval. On the substance, there is no difference between announcing a conditional approval or saying that the recovery plan will only be approved once the judicial reforms have been completed. If this can convince the Polish government to act, then support Ursula von der Leyen. When I hear some people say, at the heart of Russia’s war in Ukraine, that it is necessary to ensure that Mr Putin does not lose face, I am bristled. It is therefore difficult for me to understand that, when it comes to convincing an EU government to respect the rule of law, some people do not accept a rhetoric that must lead the Polish government to submit to our conditions. Having said that, I can in no way accept that EU money arrives in Poland without the required judicial reforms having actually taken place.

Madam President, I would like to thank Commissioner Reynders. The Commission’s annual report is a real added value for democracy in the European Union. I would like to point out, also to counter biased voices, that in this report, all Member States are subject to the same scrutiny, according to the same indicators, with the same method. However, I would like to raise a criticism already raised last year. The report must make a very clear difference between systemic and isolated violations. Pointing out this difference is essential. We cannot allow countries like Hungary or Poland to address one or the other problematic, isolated point in other countries that otherwise have healthy systems and let them put these isolated points on the same footing as violations that are disruptive, systemic and endanger the very foundations of our democracies. Secondly, I would like to note a real concern about the rule of law in the EU, in view of the contempt of some governments for the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Judgments of the Court are not optional, in particular when they are intended to prevent discrimination. We need to find a way to remedy this. Finally, I would like to end on a point that is particularly close to my heart: the independence of the media and the safety of journalists are not guaranteed. As we know, fair and free information is essential to democracy. We need to find ways to protect journalists so that they can work peacefully and without self-censorship. Investigative journalism is an important part of the fight against corruption. It is simply not acceptable for journalists to be subjected to harassment, intimidation or death threats. The Commission's proposal for a directive to act against abusive prosecutions, known as SLAPPs, is an important step. Unfortunately, we will still have to do more.

Madam President, first of all, I would like to pay tribute to the incredible courage of Ukrainian women in this war imposed on them by Russia and which nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies. Women soldiers, they are combatants in the army. Mothers and politicians, I heard them say that humanitarian aid is important, but that the most important thing is the delivery of weapons to defend their freedom. What courage also for those who set out to survive and protect their children. Fighters, yes. But there are also those who, powerless in the face of brute and inhuman force, have suffered the worst of humiliation and violence. Rape as a weapon of war has destroyed even the strongest. Physically and mentally bruised, they struggle to survive, to heal. Many came to the European Union, where most were welcomed with open arms, with great dedication from their hosts and many associations did a remarkable job. However, other dangers, unfortunately, are also lurking in our country: trafficking in human beings and abuses of all kinds. We must do our utmost to protect Ukrainians seeking refuge in our country, especially the most vulnerable among them, including single women and children. Financial, administrative, medical and psychological assistance resources must continue to be developed and developed. This is one of the points that this European Parliament resolution seeks to highlight.

The European Union has clearly asked for what needs to be done in a very clear manner, in a manner in which you can’t go and pick one word that wouldn’t be exactly what it should be. You have the text, so look at it and you’ll know it.